[34f3f3f]

I can understand people using a large vehicle if they need it for work, but there are no excuses for using one for recreation. It is selfish, and I’m glad to see social censure is becoming more prevalent. I hope is doesn’t take Paris Hilton to be seen driving around in a Smart Car to kick others into gear (excuse the pun).

Rustico …good one! …and it is happening. Someone was flogging the idea of living in old jet liners a while back, but sadly the hostesses weren’t part of the deal.

Luchabee, if you loved your kids so much you might be more concerned about what kind of a future we may be leaving behind for them.

Meadandale, you don’t need to hug trees to know that big cars pollute more and oil is running out. If you are so conscious about other environmental contributions, then why not take it one step further.

Some say the car industry is at fault here, but then they argue they must pander to the consumer. One thing that never ceases to amaze me, and is rarely mentioned is that every other country around the world uses vehicles with predominantly smaller engines. Yes, the car body has to be smaller, but since most of us, most of the time are the only person sitting in our car, do they really need to be so big? Have you ever hired a car abroad, and tapped the fuel gauge thinking it must be broken, because you have traveled for a hundred miles and it hasn’t budged, when in actual fact, it’s just the incredible fuel economy that ordinary cars abroad are achieving. They still cruise at 80 mph, climb up mountain roads, carry four passengers, and are very stylish. There is really no sacrifice here …with the possible exception of lost bragging rights over engine capacity.

Anyone tempted to suggest that small cars are somehow going to lead to European socialism, please spare yourself the embarrassment.

[34f3f3f]

I can understand people using a large vehicle if they need it for work, but there are no excuses for using one for recreation. It is selfish, and I’m glad to see social censure is becoming more prevalent. I hope is doesn’t take Paris Hilton to be seen driving around in a Smart Car to kick others into gear (excuse the pun).

Rustico …good one! …and it is happening. Someone was flogging the idea of living in old jet liners a while back, but sadly the hostesses weren’t part of the deal.

Luchabee, if you loved your kids so much you might be more concerned about what kind of a future we may be leaving behind for them.

Meadandale, you don’t need to hug trees to know that big cars pollute more and oil is running out. If you are so conscious about other environmental contributions, then why not take it one step further.

Some say the car industry is at fault here, but then they argue they must pander to the consumer. One thing that never ceases to amaze me, and is rarely mentioned is that every other country around the world uses vehicles with predominantly smaller engines. Yes, the car body has to be smaller, but since most of us, most of the time are the only person sitting in our car, do they really need to be so big? Have you ever hired a car abroad, and tapped the fuel gauge thinking it must be broken, because you have traveled for a hundred miles and it hasn’t budged, when in actual fact, it’s just the incredible fuel economy that ordinary cars abroad are achieving. They still cruise at 80 mph, climb up mountain roads, carry four passengers, and are very stylish. There is really no sacrifice here …with the possible exception of lost bragging rights over engine capacity.

Anyone tempted to suggest that small cars are somehow going to lead to European socialism, please spare yourself the embarrassment.

[34f3f3f]

I can understand people using a large vehicle if they need it for work, but there are no excuses for using one for recreation. It is selfish, and I’m glad to see social censure is becoming more prevalent. I hope is doesn’t take Paris Hilton to be seen driving around in a Smart Car to kick others into gear (excuse the pun).

Rustico …good one! …and it is happening. Someone was flogging the idea of living in old jet liners a while back, but sadly the hostesses weren’t part of the deal.

Luchabee, if you loved your kids so much you might be more concerned about what kind of a future we may be leaving behind for them.

Meadandale, you don’t need to hug trees to know that big cars pollute more and oil is running out. If you are so conscious about other environmental contributions, then why not take it one step further.

Some say the car industry is at fault here, but then they argue they must pander to the consumer. One thing that never ceases to amaze me, and is rarely mentioned is that every other country around the world uses vehicles with predominantly smaller engines. Yes, the car body has to be smaller, but since most of us, most of the time are the only person sitting in our car, do they really need to be so big? Have you ever hired a car abroad, and tapped the fuel gauge thinking it must be broken, because you have traveled for a hundred miles and it hasn’t budged, when in actual fact, it’s just the incredible fuel economy that ordinary cars abroad are achieving. They still cruise at 80 mph, climb up mountain roads, carry four passengers, and are very stylish. There is really no sacrifice here …with the possible exception of lost bragging rights over engine capacity.

Anyone tempted to suggest that small cars are somehow going to lead to European socialism, please spare yourself the embarrassment.

[34f3f3f]

I can understand people using a large vehicle if they need it for work, but there are no excuses for using one for recreation. It is selfish, and I’m glad to see social censure is becoming more prevalent. I hope is doesn’t take Paris Hilton to be seen driving around in a Smart Car to kick others into gear (excuse the pun).

Rustico …good one! …and it is happening. Someone was flogging the idea of living in old jet liners a while back, but sadly the hostesses weren’t part of the deal.

Luchabee, if you loved your kids so much you might be more concerned about what kind of a future we may be leaving behind for them.

Meadandale, you don’t need to hug trees to know that big cars pollute more and oil is running out. If you are so conscious about other environmental contributions, then why not take it one step further.

Some say the car industry is at fault here, but then they argue they must pander to the consumer. One thing that never ceases to amaze me, and is rarely mentioned is that every other country around the world uses vehicles with predominantly smaller engines. Yes, the car body has to be smaller, but since most of us, most of the time are the only person sitting in our car, do they really need to be so big? Have you ever hired a car abroad, and tapped the fuel gauge thinking it must be broken, because you have traveled for a hundred miles and it hasn’t budged, when in actual fact, it’s just the incredible fuel economy that ordinary cars abroad are achieving. They still cruise at 80 mph, climb up mountain roads, carry four passengers, and are very stylish. There is really no sacrifice here …with the possible exception of lost bragging rights over engine capacity.

Anyone tempted to suggest that small cars are somehow going to lead to European socialism, please spare yourself the embarrassment.

[34f3f3f]

I can understand people using a large vehicle if they need it for work, but there are no excuses for using one for recreation. It is selfish, and I’m glad to see social censure is becoming more prevalent. I hope is doesn’t take Paris Hilton to be seen driving around in a Smart Car to kick others into gear (excuse the pun).

Rustico …good one! …and it is happening. Someone was flogging the idea of living in old jet liners a while back, but sadly the hostesses weren’t part of the deal.

Luchabee, if you loved your kids so much you might be more concerned about what kind of a future we may be leaving behind for them.

Meadandale, you don’t need to hug trees to know that big cars pollute more and oil is running out. If you are so conscious about other environmental contributions, then why not take it one step further.

Some say the car industry is at fault here, but then they argue they must pander to the consumer. One thing that never ceases to amaze me, and is rarely mentioned is that every other country around the world uses vehicles with predominantly smaller engines. Yes, the car body has to be smaller, but since most of us, most of the time are the only person sitting in our car, do they really need to be so big? Have you ever hired a car abroad, and tapped the fuel gauge thinking it must be broken, because you have traveled for a hundred miles and it hasn’t budged, when in actual fact, it’s just the incredible fuel economy that ordinary cars abroad are achieving. They still cruise at 80 mph, climb up mountain roads, carry four passengers, and are very stylish. There is really no sacrifice here …with the possible exception of lost bragging rights over engine capacity.

Anyone tempted to suggest that small cars are somehow going to lead to European socialism, please spare yourself the embarrassment.

[34f3f3f]

This is a good article, if a little overly upbeat. It attempts to appease the uneasiness that many American’s may feel towards current trends in globalization, by pointing out they are inherently benign, and that global shifts have an historical inevitability. However, to overlook potential friction, especially when world resources are under pressure, seems to me a little foolhardy. The article pulls no punches when it comes to America’s greatest weaknesses; parochial attitudes that shape foreign policy, and an easily bruised national ego. The Iraq war was a mistake, and many of the symbols of American success and dominance have been overshadowed by the new kids on the block. The author seems to be saying that these sentiments are misplaced in a truly global economy, and that by focusing on its inherent strengths (multi-cultural population and high tech industries), the US will cure itself of it’s current gloom.

[34f3f3f]

This is a good article, if a little overly upbeat. It attempts to appease the uneasiness that many American’s may feel towards current trends in globalization, by pointing out they are inherently benign, and that global shifts have an historical inevitability. However, to overlook potential friction, especially when world resources are under pressure, seems to me a little foolhardy. The article pulls no punches when it comes to America’s greatest weaknesses; parochial attitudes that shape foreign policy, and an easily bruised national ego. The Iraq war was a mistake, and many of the symbols of American success and dominance have been overshadowed by the new kids on the block. The author seems to be saying that these sentiments are misplaced in a truly global economy, and that by focusing on its inherent strengths (multi-cultural population and high tech industries), the US will cure itself of it’s current gloom.

[34f3f3f]

This is a good article, if a little overly upbeat. It attempts to appease the uneasiness that many American’s may feel towards current trends in globalization, by pointing out they are inherently benign, and that global shifts have an historical inevitability. However, to overlook potential friction, especially when world resources are under pressure, seems to me a little foolhardy. The article pulls no punches when it comes to America’s greatest weaknesses; parochial attitudes that shape foreign policy, and an easily bruised national ego. The Iraq war was a mistake, and many of the symbols of American success and dominance have been overshadowed by the new kids on the block. The author seems to be saying that these sentiments are misplaced in a truly global economy, and that by focusing on its inherent strengths (multi-cultural population and high tech industries), the US will cure itself of it’s current gloom.

[34f3f3f]

This is a good article, if a little overly upbeat. It attempts to appease the uneasiness that many American’s may feel towards current trends in globalization, by pointing out they are inherently benign, and that global shifts have an historical inevitability. However, to overlook potential friction, especially when world resources are under pressure, seems to me a little foolhardy. The article pulls no punches when it comes to America’s greatest weaknesses; parochial attitudes that shape foreign policy, and an easily bruised national ego. The Iraq war was a mistake, and many of the symbols of American success and dominance have been overshadowed by the new kids on the block. The author seems to be saying that these sentiments are misplaced in a truly global economy, and that by focusing on its inherent strengths (multi-cultural population and high tech industries), the US will cure itself of it’s current gloom.

[34f3f3f]

This is a good article, if a little overly upbeat. It attempts to appease the uneasiness that many American’s may feel towards current trends in globalization, by pointing out they are inherently benign, and that global shifts have an historical inevitability. However, to overlook potential friction, especially when world resources are under pressure, seems to me a little foolhardy. The article pulls no punches when it comes to America’s greatest weaknesses; parochial attitudes that shape foreign policy, and an easily bruised national ego. The Iraq war was a mistake, and many of the symbols of American success and dominance have been overshadowed by the new kids on the block. The author seems to be saying that these sentiments are misplaced in a truly global economy, and that by focusing on its inherent strengths (multi-cultural population and high tech industries), the US will cure itself of it’s current gloom.

[34f3f3f]

One theory. Since the dot.com crash and 9/11 Greenspan was looking for something to stimulate the economy. The massive amount of equity in homes, when released was seen as an excellent way. The housing market is one of the pistons that drives the US economy, in two respects; it creates cash that is spent on consumer goods (good for the economy), and has developed a huge industry (financial, construction) around it, also good for the economy. Well, that’s what everyone thought. Where it seemed to go wrong, was that lowering interest rates lead to a speculative bubble, and the financial industry developed ahead of regulation, and ultimately is leading to a recession.

I think the whole notion of housing as being the driving force of an economy needs to be examined. One obvious failure of the system is the enormous amount of debt that has accumulated, and the shock waves it causes when left unchecked. So, in answer to the question, I would say “No”. However, with dependence of foreign oil, and a declining manufacturing base, there needs to be someway for the US economy to stay on top. Financial services are a way, but the regulators need to catch up with the avalanche of new financial instruments, and the industry itself needs to calm down, lick it’s wounds, and learn from it’s mistakes.

[34f3f3f]

One theory. Since the dot.com crash and 9/11 Greenspan was looking for something to stimulate the economy. The massive amount of equity in homes, when released was seen as an excellent way. The housing market is one of the pistons that drives the US economy, in two respects; it creates cash that is spent on consumer goods (good for the economy), and has developed a huge industry (financial, construction) around it, also good for the economy. Well, that’s what everyone thought. Where it seemed to go wrong, was that lowering interest rates lead to a speculative bubble, and the financial industry developed ahead of regulation, and ultimately is leading to a recession.

I think the whole notion of housing as being the driving force of an economy needs to be examined. One obvious failure of the system is the enormous amount of debt that has accumulated, and the shock waves it causes when left unchecked. So, in answer to the question, I would say “No”. However, with dependence of foreign oil, and a declining manufacturing base, there needs to be someway for the US economy to stay on top. Financial services are a way, but the regulators need to catch up with the avalanche of new financial instruments, and the industry itself needs to calm down, lick it’s wounds, and learn from it’s mistakes.

[34f3f3f]

One theory. Since the dot.com crash and 9/11 Greenspan was looking for something to stimulate the economy. The massive amount of equity in homes, when released was seen as an excellent way. The housing market is one of the pistons that drives the US economy, in two respects; it creates cash that is spent on consumer goods (good for the economy), and has developed a huge industry (financial, construction) around it, also good for the economy. Well, that’s what everyone thought. Where it seemed to go wrong, was that lowering interest rates lead to a speculative bubble, and the financial industry developed ahead of regulation, and ultimately is leading to a recession.

I think the whole notion of housing as being the driving force of an economy needs to be examined. One obvious failure of the system is the enormous amount of debt that has accumulated, and the shock waves it causes when left unchecked. So, in answer to the question, I would say “No”. However, with dependence of foreign oil, and a declining manufacturing base, there needs to be someway for the US economy to stay on top. Financial services are a way, but the regulators need to catch up with the avalanche of new financial instruments, and the industry itself needs to calm down, lick it’s wounds, and learn from it’s mistakes.

[34f3f3f]

One theory. Since the dot.com crash and 9/11 Greenspan was looking for something to stimulate the economy. The massive amount of equity in homes, when released was seen as an excellent way. The housing market is one of the pistons that drives the US economy, in two respects; it creates cash that is spent on consumer goods (good for the economy), and has developed a huge industry (financial, construction) around it, also good for the economy. Well, that’s what everyone thought. Where it seemed to go wrong, was that lowering interest rates lead to a speculative bubble, and the financial industry developed ahead of regulation, and ultimately is leading to a recession.

I think the whole notion of housing as being the driving force of an economy needs to be examined. One obvious failure of the system is the enormous amount of debt that has accumulated, and the shock waves it causes when left unchecked. So, in answer to the question, I would say “No”. However, with dependence of foreign oil, and a declining manufacturing base, there needs to be someway for the US economy to stay on top. Financial services are a way, but the regulators need to catch up with the avalanche of new financial instruments, and the industry itself needs to calm down, lick it’s wounds, and learn from it’s mistakes.

[34f3f3f]

One theory. Since the dot.com crash and 9/11 Greenspan was looking for something to stimulate the economy. The massive amount of equity in homes, when released was seen as an excellent way. The housing market is one of the pistons that drives the US economy, in two respects; it creates cash that is spent on consumer goods (good for the economy), and has developed a huge industry (financial, construction) around it, also good for the economy. Well, that’s what everyone thought. Where it seemed to go wrong, was that lowering interest rates lead to a speculative bubble, and the financial industry developed ahead of regulation, and ultimately is leading to a recession.

I think the whole notion of housing as being the driving force of an economy needs to be examined. One obvious failure of the system is the enormous amount of debt that has accumulated, and the shock waves it causes when left unchecked. So, in answer to the question, I would say “No”. However, with dependence of foreign oil, and a declining manufacturing base, there needs to be someway for the US economy to stay on top. Financial services are a way, but the regulators need to catch up with the avalanche of new financial instruments, and the industry itself needs to calm down, lick it’s wounds, and learn from it’s mistakes.

[Author]

Posts